ISTE Technology Facilitation and Technology Leadership Standard VII - Procedures, Policies, Planning, and Budgeting for Technology Environments
Technology Facilitation and Leadership (TF/TL) Standard VII addresses Procedures, Policies, Planning, and Budgeting for Technology Environments. Standard VII states: “Educational technology facilitators promote the development and implementation of technology infrastructure, procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for PK-12 schools” (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p. 165). The standard also states: “Educational technology leaders coordinate development and direct implementation of technology infrastructure procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for PK-12 schools” (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p. 165). The difference in Standard VII for educational technology facilitators and leaders is that facilitators are required to promote the development and implementation while leaders should coordinate development and direct implementation of technology infrastructure, procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for PK-12 schools.
EDLD 5362 Information Systems Management provides an excellent example of Standard VII. The course embedded assignment for the course involves interviewing school administrators from the Technology Department in an effort to obtain information regarding total cost of ownership, feature set, ease of use, customer support, and training. The information is then used to evaluate and analyze the district Student Information System (SIS). “School districts use data mining software to analyze student test scores” (Solomon and Schrum, 2007, p. 76).
Public school districts in Texas are required to submit reports to the Texas Education Agency involving data from multiple functions of the districts. Much of the information submitted in the reports is used to satisfy requirements of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. Adequately yearly progress, for example is related to school achievements as measured by student success on standardized exams. Highly Qualified teacher status as defined by NCLB relates to the level of education, official teaching credentials, and demonstrated content knowledge of the district’s educators.
With a vast amount of data to coordinate from various district departments, districts rely heavily on student information systems (SIS). One way to achieve optimal advantage of resources is to utilize existing technology to maximum capability. According to Rebecca Sausner (2003), “Four key ideas continually surface when it comes to making the most of the SIS technology: leadership, communication, training and more training” (para. 15). Optimal usage of technology requires adequate training of end-users.
As reporting requirements and district enrollments increase, district leaders turn to technology departments for aide in collecting, accessing and analyzing student and staff information and data. Sausner (2003) writes “Suddenly, reports on adequate yearly progress, highly qualified teachers and other topics have focused the spotlight on SISs and the companies that make them.” Technology departments evaluate a variety of SIS systems to ensure a system that will meet the needs of the district is selected. In reference to districts’ needs beyond attendance and scheduling, Sausner (2003) states, “The leading technology vendors in the SIS market say customer demand has led to fervent work on state-specific reporting modules.”
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New Tools, New Schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in
Technology Facilitation and Leadership (TF/TL) Standard VII addresses Procedures, Policies, Planning, and Budgeting for Technology Environments. Standard VII states: “Educational technology facilitators promote the development and implementation of technology infrastructure, procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for PK-12 schools” (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p. 165). The standard also states: “Educational technology leaders coordinate development and direct implementation of technology infrastructure procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for PK-12 schools” (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p. 165). The difference in Standard VII for educational technology facilitators and leaders is that facilitators are required to promote the development and implementation while leaders should coordinate development and direct implementation of technology infrastructure, procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for PK-12 schools.
EDLD 5362 Information Systems Management provides an excellent example of Standard VII. The course embedded assignment for the course involves interviewing school administrators from the Technology Department in an effort to obtain information regarding total cost of ownership, feature set, ease of use, customer support, and training. The information is then used to evaluate and analyze the district Student Information System (SIS). “School districts use data mining software to analyze student test scores” (Solomon and Schrum, 2007, p. 76).
Public school districts in Texas are required to submit reports to the Texas Education Agency involving data from multiple functions of the districts. Much of the information submitted in the reports is used to satisfy requirements of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. Adequately yearly progress, for example is related to school achievements as measured by student success on standardized exams. Highly Qualified teacher status as defined by NCLB relates to the level of education, official teaching credentials, and demonstrated content knowledge of the district’s educators.
With a vast amount of data to coordinate from various district departments, districts rely heavily on student information systems (SIS). One way to achieve optimal advantage of resources is to utilize existing technology to maximum capability. According to Rebecca Sausner (2003), “Four key ideas continually surface when it comes to making the most of the SIS technology: leadership, communication, training and more training” (para. 15). Optimal usage of technology requires adequate training of end-users.
As reporting requirements and district enrollments increase, district leaders turn to technology departments for aide in collecting, accessing and analyzing student and staff information and data. Sausner (2003) writes “Suddenly, reports on adequate yearly progress, highly qualified teachers and other topics have focused the spotlight on SISs and the companies that make them.” Technology departments evaluate a variety of SIS systems to ensure a system that will meet the needs of the district is selected. In reference to districts’ needs beyond attendance and scheduling, Sausner (2003) states, “The leading technology vendors in the SIS market say customer demand has led to fervent work on state-specific reporting modules.”
References
Sausner, R. (2003, November). Making paperwork fulfilling. District Administrator. Retrieved from: http://www.districtadministration.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=103
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New Tools, New Schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in
Education.